Dominion Strategy Forum
Miscellaneous => Forum Games => Topic started by: Watno on October 11, 2015, 07:50:10 am
-
This was definitely the game I liked best in Essen, and I think it would work quite well here.
It's pretty simple. There's a 5x5 grid of words and 2 teams of at least 2 people each (one team is blue, the other is red). Some of the words are (blue or red) agents, some are civilians, and one is the assassin. One player from each the team, the spymaster, gets to know which words are which, and in the game, he gives clues to the rest of his team to find the agents of that team's color. The first tean to identify all it's agents wins, but if a team guesses that the assassin is one of their agents, they immediately lose.
Giving clues works as follows: One spymaster starts and says a single word that is associated to as many agents of his own color, but not to any of the other words, especially not the assassin. He then says the number of agents of his own color belong to the word. Then the rest of his team guesses what these words are. They guess one word at a time, and the identity of the word is then revealed. If it was correct, they may guess again, for as most as many times as the number the spymaster said plus one. If they hit a civilian or an agent of the opposite color, or decide to stop guessing, it's now the other team's turn. If they hit the assassin, they lose immediately.
Full rules can be found here: http://czechgames.com/files/rules/codenames-rules-en.pdf
Anyone interested in playing? I think the ideal number of players would be 4, because if the guessing parts of the teams contain more than 1 person, they'd need to discuss their guesses, which could lead to long waiting timeson the forum.
UPDATE: You can now start games on your own without needing a moderator:
Kuildeous made a Google spreadsheet that allows you to easily create your own game without a moderator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TXkY5snm_uhZQNYvGqwrLSHjuHARIZouOP5pBEWRMXA/edit#gid=0
One spymaster simply opens the sheet, waits for it to fully load (i.e the words don't start with BOOT, KEY,...), then copies the two messages in the bottom right and sends it to the appropriate places.
-
And i just saw there are PBFs going on at BGG, if someone wants to see how it works: https://boardgamegeek.com/forum/1623143/codenames/play-forum
-
/in
-
In.
-
I will take the role of one Spymaster for the first game so i can mod as well (there's no hidden info for the spymasters). Unless you guys have preferences, I'll randomize the teams and who the other spymaster will be.
Need one more player to start.
-
I'll /in sounds fun
-
/in (Edit: Looks like I'm too late. I'll play the second game).
-
Are we starting? Are we playing in this thread?
-
I started a new thread for the actual game here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14007.0
Need 3 more people to start another game.
-
/in
-
/in
-
/in
-
Second game started: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14013.0
-
This looks interesting. I'd be bad at it but after a game is done or something I'd try to play one.
-
I'd like to try as well.
-
I'll play one!
-
Yo this game looks cool. I'd also like to play one
-
3rd game up: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14043.0
-
Watno, where are you pulling the words from? The game, or just randomly?
-
I assembled a list of words in the game from Bgg screenshots since I only have the German version and noticed translating doesn't really work. The words are all cleverly chosen to have multiple meanings.
-
I'd like to play once or be a mod if someone can explain how the grid works.
-
I'd like to play once or be a mod if someone can explain how the grid works.
Grid might as well just be a list, doesn't matter that it's a grid. Check out one of the ongoing games, it's pretty simple to figure out.
-
I'd play too
-
I think I want in on one. I've not played a forum game in a while so I've been ignoring this forum. I'll check back here periodically to see if I'm in a game, though I wouldn't be upset if I get a mail message.
-
great, so now it's XP + Kuildeous + me, just need one more
-
Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me!
-
sure, if Watno mods another one
I think we only need the word grid and assigned roles, after that the spymasters can flip and pass turns. it's not like they can lie.
-
Game started.
-
Thank you so much!
-
Forming a queue for another match ...
-
/in if it happens again
-
Looks a bit odd to tell the special someone who's going to set it up how to do it, but I'd like it better as a 6p game. More table talk.
-
/in for next one
-
Looks a bit odd to tell the special someone who's going to set it up how to do it, but I'd like it better as a 6p game. More table talk.
I think this doesn't really work though (or it does work, but it is very exploitable). If you allow table talk, then you would allow non-spymasters to post a long list of clues the spymaster should give for specific combinations of cards. So I just post a list "if it's these 8 cards, say this, if it's these, say that...." Game over.
So you have to restrict talking. But that is always trouble. I don't think anything other than "all talk is allowed" or "no talk is allowed" is loophole-free.
-
I'm happy to retract my request if the participants should share this concern. Playing with table talk has been done and has shown to be enjoyable, but I agree that it could easily be destroyed depending on your attitude.
-
I think this doesn't really work though (or it does work, but it is very exploitable). If you allow table talk, then you would allow non-spymasters to post a long list of clues the spymaster should give for specific combinations of cards. So I just post a list "if it's these 8 cards, say this, if it's these, say that...." Game over.
So you have to restrict talking. But that is always trouble. I don't think anything other than "all talk is allowed" or "no talk is allowed" is loophole-free.
This is something I had not considered. I think that it would violate the spirit of the game, and such things should be disallowed.
I understand table talk to be conversation between the guessers. In fact, for this to work, there should be no interaction with the spymasters. I would go so far as to say that spymasters are not allowed to post anything but their clues and the results of the guesses. Likewise, guessers cannot post anything to the spymasters. This can be done already today. There's nothing stopping a guesser from telling the spymaster in private message what clue to give for certain words except just plain, old-fashioned good decorum.
So, how about this for the table talk?
* Spymaster is not allowed to say anything aside from clues and guess results.
* Guessers cannot speak to the spymasters, including passive commands like, "If he meant for Ball to be picked, he'll surely say 'dog' next time."
* Guessers can speak to each other about the clues, but the opposite team could glean which words are not theirs, so beware.
Is this loophole-free? Not in the slightest, but it all depends on how much you trust your teammates to not spoil the fun. There are a lot of games on here that rely on trust.
-
I think this doesn't really work though (or it does work, but it is very exploitable). If you allow table talk, then you would allow non-spymasters to post a long list of clues the spymaster should give for specific combinations of cards. So I just post a list "if it's these 8 cards, say this, if it's these, say that...." Game over.
So you have to restrict talking. But that is always trouble. I don't think anything other than "all talk is allowed" or "no talk is allowed" is loophole-free.
This is something I had not considered. I think that it would violate the spirit of the game, and such things should be disallowed.
I understand table talk to be conversation between the guessers. In fact, for this to work, there should be no interaction with the spymasters. I would go so far as to say that spymasters are not allowed to post anything but their clues and the results of the guesses. Likewise, guessers cannot post anything to the spymasters. This can be done already today. There's nothing stopping a guesser from telling the spymaster in private message what clue to give for certain words except just plain, old-fashioned good decorum.
So, how about this for the table talk?
* Spymaster is not allowed to say anything aside from clues and guess results.
* Guessers cannot speak to the spymasters, including passive commands like, "If he meant for Ball to be picked, he'll surely say 'dog' next time."
* Guessers can speak to each other about the clues, but the opposite team could glean which words are not theirs, so beware.
Is this loophole-free? Not in the slightest, but it all depends on how much you trust your teammates to not spoil the fun. There are a lot of games on here that rely on trust.
I think the answer is QuickTopics.
The main forum thread is only for clues, guesses, and results.
You open a QT for all guessers (I'd use just one, to simulate everyone being in the same room) where they can say anything they want, but the spymasters can't see or read until after the game.
So, it's more fun for the guessers, but it's the same game for the spymasters.
-
Can someone start a 4p game already?
-
Can someone start a 4p game already?
oh /in
-
Kuildeous made a Google spreadsheet that allows you to easily create your own game without a moderator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TXkY5snm_uhZQNYvGqwrLSHjuHARIZouOP5pBEWRMXA/edit#gid=0
One spymaster simply opens the sheet, waits for it to fully load (i.e the words don't start with BOOT, KEY,...), then copies the two messages in the bottom right and sends it to the appropriate places.
-
Which reminds me that I need to clean that up, but Watno's instructions are clear enough.
-
So far, only ehunt, egork, Kuildeous and me are game, which'd be enough for one guesser per team. Two more?
The spreadsheet instructions look clear enough to me. I have only read access but I take that the pattern is re-randomized if I hit [F5].
That QuickTopic thing would be one more password for me to memorise; can't we just blacken the table talk and Spymaster vows not to spoiler herself?
[EDIT: Kuildeous joining]
-
So far, only ehunt, egork and me are game, which'd be enough for one team. Three more?
The spreadsheet instructions look clear enough to me. I have only read access but I take that the pattern is re-randomized if I hit [F5].
That QuickTopic thing would be one more password for me to memorise; can't we just blacken the table talk and Spymaster vows not to spoiler herself?
That would also work. As would a separate table talk thread.
-
I'd be up for team Codenames. I've only used that spreadsheet for one game. Might as well get more use out of it.
-
I'll try the team game.
-
I would also be down for the team game
-
ill do either way
-
I'll get involved in as many (2v2) games of this as has a spot free. It's fun and less awful when I can't "keep up" than Mafia, since all I need to know is current grid, whose turn it is, and the clue.
I'd also be interested in trying a team variant but I'm not clear on how team Codenames works, exactly.
-
I'd play another 2v2 too. Team variant not so much.
-
I'll get involved in as many (2v2) games of this as has a spot free. It's fun and less awful when I can't "keep up" than Mafia, since all I need to know is current grid, whose turn it is, and the clue.
I'd also be interested in trying a team variant but I'm not clear on how team Codenames works, exactly.
One match has just started at http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14155.0, you may want to follow it from time to time.
-
I'll get involved in as many (2v2) games of this as has a spot free. It's fun and less awful when I can't "keep up" than Mafia, since all I need to know is current grid, whose turn it is, and the clue.
I'd also be interested in trying a team variant but I'm not clear on how team Codenames works, exactly.
You actually also need to know prior clues you didn't fully solve :P
-
I'll get involved in as many (2v2) games of this as has a spot free. It's fun and less awful when I can't "keep up" than Mafia, since all I need to know is current grid, whose turn it is, and the clue.
I'd also be interested in trying a team variant but I'm not clear on how team Codenames works, exactly.
You actually also need to know prior clues you didn't fully solve :P
First I have to quit fully solving them ;)
-
It can also help to pay attention to what the other spymaster said. If the other person didn't get all the clues, then that might help you rule out certain words.
Though that can be dangerous. In game IV, the spymaster said Hitler, so I figured Brazil would be one of them. Turned out he wasn't going that route, and Brazil was actually my color. Fortunately, my spymaster gave me a stronger clue for Brazil so I went against my initial thought.
Of course, winging it can be fun too.
-
It can also help to pay attention to what the other spymaster said. If the other person didn't get all the clues, then that might help you rule out certain words.
Though that can be dangerous. In game IV, the spymaster said Hitler, so I figured Brazil would be one of them. Turned out he wasn't going that route, and Brazil was actually my color. Fortunately, my spymaster gave me a stronger clue for Brazil so I went against my initial thought.
Of course, winging it can be fun too.
I don't actually know the Brazil connection.
-
I don't actually know the Brazil connection.
I didn't either :'(
-
Or Argentina.
Source: that one episode of The Simpsons
-
I don't actually know the Brazil connection.
Probably a generational thing. As he would be 126 years old now, I guess the likelihood of him still hiding out in South America is even slimmer than before.
Also, the Boys from Brazil was a movie about duplicating Hitler.
So yeah, I'm going to chalk that up to a niche cultural thing and not assume people know those references.
In any case, it probably helps to know what the other team clues were in case they don't get everything.
-
Still, that's a much simpler process than keeping up with mafia.
-
I am just noticing that in boardgamegeek some matches are set up which explicitly rule out search engines. How do you feel about it? I think usage of Google can be exploited to a degree that would change the game, but this game should not encourage stretching the limits of the rules anyway.
-
I think google should be allowed. Lots of times there is a reference that you don't understand because you have a different background
-
I don't like it... I think it's fine if you can make up for your lack of knowledge by putting in some extra effort.
-
To some extent, I think not allowing Google is interesting in that it forces your spymaster to "play to your partner", meaning post-game we can all discuss why we didn't understand X or Y clue and learn more about each other.
-
I wouldn't mind joining 4 player game in addition to team game I'm participating in
-
So now that I've played this in real life, I have a question... I noticed that in the Team Codenames game thread, the rules say that discussion between guessers should be in spoiler tags and that the clue-givers shouldn't look at them. Well this sort of rule doesn't exist in regular codenames... when the clue is given, the guessers discuss it, while the clue-giver can hear all that discussion. And it can be important strategically; he can use the stuff he learns from their discussion to help guide his next clue. Similar to how in Mysterium, listening to the teammates discuss what they think the clue means can help the ghost give his next clue.
Is there a reason that this rule was introduced for the forum version?
-
Faust said somewhere that you could post something that would ruin the game so we decided we would do spoiler tags
-
Faust said somewhere that you could post something that would ruin the game so we decided we would do spoiler tags
What sort of thing could the guessers, who don't have any information that's not completely public, say that would cause a problem?
-
'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'
-
'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'
Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.
-
'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'
Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.
Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.
-
'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'
Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.
Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.
It's even easier than that. Assign each of the words a letter of the alphabet and then just post your first clue as heiuochsw: 9 and you have won the game.
-
'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'
Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.
Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.
It's even easier than that. Assign each of the words a letter of the alphabet and then just post your first clue as heiuochsw: 9 and you have won the game.
Of course, all these approaches would be thwarted by the rule that clues may only be associated by meaning (so it's illegal to go "bravo 4" if four of your words start with b), but a less obvious stunt than the one I suggested (with more related words) would be a first step on a slippery slope.
It's a game where rules have room for interpretation and this is important to have people know beforehand.
-
Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.
If you can post a list 2042975 words long, you deserve to win the game.
-
Considering some of the conversation I had in spoilers on that team game, I could see inadvertently feeding clues to the spymaster. I'd be less worried about it happening IRL.
-
We just finished rounds with guessing teams of two using both open and concealed talk. I think in the end everyone was ok with open talk. It is clear that this game needs more "fair play" or rather "playing to the spirit of the laws" anyway.
I'd be interested to join another round of six.
-
I'd be interested to play as well.
-
I'd be interested to play as well.
I'll play
-
I would prefer 4p game, but would play 6p
-
I would prefer 4p game, but would play 6p
don't we have 4 already?
-
I would play.
-
I would prefer 4p game, but would play 6p
don't we have 4 already?
Aren't they all dead?
-
I would prefer 4p game, but would play 6p
don't we have 4 already?
Aren't they all dead?
I meant players to start a game, but I missed that ipofanes actually wants to do a 6 player one, so it's moot anyways.
-
I'll join another one. Our current game is in the final round.
-
Same here
-
I VANT TO PLAY.
Even if I don't post in this thread I'm basically auto /in to fill any of these.
-
I would be /in to play this. Just message me if you need me for a player. This game looks pretty neat.
-
Okay, I can mod a game, or two. I wanna play in them, though, and I prefer 2 vs 2.
So, to make sure no-one is playing against his will, just post /in again, and I'll open one with the following 3 /in's - and another one if we get another 3.
-
I'll use the gdoc form in the OP and randomize teams.
-
in!
-
/in
-
In
-
open! (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14888.new#new)
-
/in
-
/in
Anyone else? Jorbles, Kuildeous?
-
/in
-
I'd be happy to play in another, if another player is needed.
-
So, we'd be four even w/o Silverspawn. Anyone feels like randomizing the board?
-
I've found a few ways to generate the colors online, but not sure how to randomize the words.
-
Yeah, I'm in, let's do it.
-
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14899.new#new
-
Chairs, your move.
-
I've found a few ways to generate the colors online, but not sure how to randomize the words.
I devised a Google Docs to randomize words and the colors. I used a list that was presented earlier, but if there's a more robust list, I could update the randomizer to include them.
-
Chairs, your move.
I played, waiting on you now.
-
I'd play if there is interest
-
Brilliant! Would you like to join us at Codenames VII? We are in search of a 4th player.
-
Oh snap, PBF codenames sounds awesome
-
Codenames has been tried with variations on the word cards. The 5 by 5 grid can be filled with anything, be it Dixit cards, Pokémon cards, or even board games. Has anyone tried it with Such A Thing cards? The game rubs a bit the wrong way with me because disputes come up so often about which description fits. This conflict would be mitigated quite a bit if the room for interpretation is explored by members of the same team. Only the range of clues would have to be defined, but I think the original Such A Thing ruleset by which something like a horned apple is invalid should be good to go.
-
I wanna play again :) Is there any game I can join?
-
I wanna play again :) Is there any game I can join?
Same question! But I didn't play before
-
EgorK, LaLight, Hugovj, and popsofctown, you guys should set up a game to play together. It seems like you all wanted to play if there was interest.
-
EgorK, LaLight, Hugovj, and popsofctown, you guys should set up a game to play together. It seems like you all wanted to play if there was interest.
OK, I'm ready to make a board, one think that I do not know is where to take initial words from?
-
EgorK, LaLight, Hugovj, and popsofctown, you guys should set up a game to play together. It seems like you all wanted to play if there was interest.
OK, I'm ready to make a board, one think that I do not know is where to take initial words from?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TXkY5snm_uhZQNYvGqwrLSHjuHARIZouOP5pBEWRMXA/edit#gid=0
-
I made it http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=15787.0
-
Codenames has been tried with variations on the word cards. The 5 by 5 grid can be filled with anything, be it Dixit cards, Pokémon cards, or even board games. Has anyone tried it with Such A Thing cards? The game rubs a bit the wrong way with me because disputes come up so often about which description fits. This conflict would be mitigated quite a bit if the room for interpretation is explored by members of the same team. Only the range of clues would have to be defined, but I think the original Such A Thing ruleset by which something like a horned apple is invalid should be good to go.
And now a pictures version has been announced.
-
I made it http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=15787.0
Dang, missed it.
Always open for another one.
-
Codenames has been tried with variations on the word cards. The 5 by 5 grid can be filled with anything, be it Dixit cards, Pokémon cards, or even board games. Has anyone tried it with Such A Thing cards? The game rubs a bit the wrong way with me because disputes come up so often about which description fits. This conflict would be mitigated quite a bit if the room for interpretation is explored by members of the same team. Only the range of clues would have to be defined, but I think the original Such A Thing ruleset by which something like a horned apple is invalid should be good to go.
And now a pictures version has been announced.
One time while we were playing, we theorized on playing Codenames using Dixit cards instead. We never did.
I suspect a pictures version would be more concrete than the Dixit cards.
Then someone suggested using Cards Against Humanity, and we just dispersed and never talked to each other again.